Exemption notification conditions cannot be imported from another notification to restrict eligibility for first-clearance benefits.

The exemption under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. could not be curtailed by importing a deeming condition from Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. for treating clearances to Nepal as home consumption while computing the first 3,500 MT. Because Notification No. 6/2002-C.E. did not itself contain that stipulation, the Revenue could not rely on a condition found in another notification to reduce eligibility. The demand was therefore unsustainable, and the impugned demand was set aside with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether clearances made to Nepal could be treated as home consumption for computing the first clearances of 3,500 MT under Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., by importing the deeming condition from Notification No. 8/2003-C.E.

Analysis: The condition relied upon by the Revenue was contained in a different notification. The relevant exemption notification did not itself state that clearances to Nepal or Bhutan were to be treated as clearances for home consumption for the purpose of the 3,500 MT limit. In the absence of such a stipulation in Notification No. 6/2002-C.E., the condition from Notification No. 8/2003-C.E. could not be read into it for computing eligibility.

Conclusion: The demand was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed.

Final Conclusion: The exemption benefit could not be curtailed by importing a condition from another notification, and the impugned demand was set aside with consequential relief.

---